Bakgrund: Stress Prevention Project var ett pilotprojekt som pågick inom ett stort multinationellt högteknologiskt företag under åren 2012-2014. Syftet med projektet var att kartlägga rotorsakerna till medarbetarnas upplevda stress och att ta fram ett arbetssätt för att förebygga dessa rotorsaker. När pilotprojektet var avslutat togs beslut om att interventionen skulle implementeras i hela organisationen. Som inledning till interventionsprocessen kallades samtliga chefer och HR-personal till en utbildning i psykosocial arbetsmiljörond. Utbildningen innefattade dels en introduktion till psykosociala faktorer i arbetsmiljön och hur dessa kan påverka medarbetarna, dels en genomgång av den enkät som används för att kartlägga den psykosociala arbetsmiljön och hur dess resultat ska tolkas. Syfte: Syftet med den aktuella studien är att utvärdera det inledande utbildningstillfället, att utvärdera om det är disponerat på ett relevant sätt och vad dess innehåll tillför själva interventionsprocessen. Avgränsningar: Författarna har endast utvärderat det inledande utbildningstillfället som är en del av den större interventionen.  Metod: Studien var en kvalitativ intervjustudie med tolkande och reflekterande ansats. Intervjuerna genomfördes i fokusgrupper om 2-4 deltagare. I undantagsfall genomfördes enskilda intervjuer, detta på grund av att det inte gick att samla alla chefer då deras scheman i övrigt var fullbokade. Ett urval av chefer från tre olika utbildningsomgångar och avdelningar tillfrågades om deltagande. Deltagandet var frivilligt och all information behandlades konfidentiellt. Resultat: Resultatet visar att utbildare och deltagare i stor utsträckning hade samma bild av vad utbildningen hade för mål och syfte samt att dessa uppfylldes med undantag av en målsättning. Trots genomgången utbildningen upplever flera deltagare att de fortfarande är dåligt rustade för att ta sig an arbetet med att förändra den psykosociala arbetsmiljön i sina respektive arbetsgrupper. De är dock nöjda med att utbildningen inleder interventionsprocessen och anser att den är viktig för interventionens kvalitet. De önskar även någon form av uppföljning av utbildningstillfället. / Background: Stress Prevention Project was a pilot project that took place in a global high-tech company during 2012-2014. The aim of the project was to identify the root causes of employees' perceived stress and to develop an approach for preventing these root causes. When the pilot project was completed a decision was taken that the intervention would be implemented throughout the organization. As a prelude to the intervention process all managers and HR personnel participated in a training session in “Psychosocial Work Environment Round”. The training included an introduction to psychosocial factors in the work environment and how these may affect employees, and a review of the questionnaire that was used to identify the psychosocial working environment and how its results should be interpreted.   Aim: The aim of this study is to evaluate the initial training session, whether it is structured in a relevant way and what its content brings the intervention process.   Limitations: The authors have only evaluated the initial training session that is a part of the larger intervention process.   Method: The study was a qualitative interview study of interpretative and reflective approach. A selection of managers from three different training sessions and departments were asked to participate in the study. Participation was voluntary and all information treated confidentially. The interviews were carried out in focus groups of 2-4 participants. In exceptional cases individual interviews were conducted, this was because it was not possible to gather all the managers in the same session due to their different schedules.   Results: The result shows that trainers and participants largely had the same perception regarding the aim and goals of the training session.  All goals were met with one exception.   Despite completed training session several of the participants still felt unsure how to manage and affect the psychosocial work environment in their working group. However, they are satisfied with the training session as well as the intervention process. They consider the training to be important to secure the quality of the intervention. The participant inquire for a follow-up of the training session.

Background: The Swedish Royal School of Technology (KTH) was hired to conduct a pilot study project on stress prevention, "Stress Prevention Project" in a Swedish high-tech global manufacturing company with headquarters in Sweden. The aim was to identify the root causes of stress among employees at the organizational level and to offer a way to prevent the root causes. The initiative to implement the project came from the HR department in the company. The occupational health department had not been able to lower the costs of sickness and rehabilitation. One of nine divisions was included in this evaluation study. The project was carried out during the years of 2012-2014, and three quantitative stress measurements were carried out using the modern working environment form “Modern Work Life” based of knowledge from KTH and designed by Metodicum. The present study has evaluated the root causes of the division's stress. In the division, it was stated that the risk areas that the division had to work with were: resources, demands, control, support but also leadership and reorganization with implementing the Agile methods (autonomous work) in the form of. The aim was to improve the psychosocial occupational health and to make the production work more efficient. Aim: The aim was to evaluate the effect of stress preventive measures in one of the nine divisions (that were included in the overall project) and the effect of implementing the Agile methods (autonomous work) in the organization. Limitations: The evaluation is restricted to one of the nine divisions. Method: The method is a quantitative and qualitative case study, with a narrative approach. The study includes a division with 200 employees of which data was collected from 18 of these employees in two focus groups interviews. Materials have also been collected from interviews with the division's HR director, section leader, head of unit and head of the organization's business health. The evaluation is based on qualitative data, which were obtained through 3 single interviews and 4 focus group interviews and participant observation. Quantitative data were obtained through three different measurements (between 2012-14). The quantitative data were compared and analyzed with the qualitative data in order to understand the results up to the final measurement 3 (2014). Results: The evaluation of the stress prevention – where the focus was to prevent risk areas including demands, develop resources, control, support and also leadership – showed that introducing and using the Agile working principles had had a significant positive effect on all the risk areas. Additionally, this change in the organization contributed to positive results regarding the efficiency of the production process; a reduction of working hours from 12 months to 2 weeks of action at the same result. The absence due to illness and rehabilitation has been decreasing from 4 % to 0,5-1% right after introducing the Agile methods in the division. However, the results also showed no improvement regarding some other working environment; as conflicts and bullying persisted. This may be due to how the reorganization of the groups was done. It should be clarified that the outcomes may be influenced by the extensive reorganization that took place in connection with the stress prevention project and the introduction of the agile approach. Conclusions - The stress prevention could not have been done efficiently due to other on-going reorganizations in the company and the staff has not been able to follow the recommendation for efficient stress-prevention due to lack of support from the headquarter. That created a crisis in the stress prevention-project group. The agile methods seem to have had a significant good result in all risk areas as resources, demands, control, support and also leadership and the absence has decreased from 4 to 0,5 %. Due to the agile methods have the productions process been shorter from 12 months to 2 weeks.